November 24, 2013 |
“Why don’t we know who one of the most powerful people in America is? What he has done? Why '60 Minutes' called him Dr. Evil?” asks Saru Jayaraman, a leader in a growing national movement of restaurant workers demanding better pay and working conditions.

Dr. Evil is Richard Berman, a Washington-based lawyer-turned-hitman for Big Food who pioneered and still deploys many of the most intentionally deceptive, inflammatory and anti-democratic tactics used in corporate propaganda campaigns today. For nearly four decades, Berman’s attacks have tried to smear, discredit and destroy public-interest causes and groups by a toxic brew of industry front groups, distortion-filled attacks, ridicule and bullying to stoke prejudice and hatred as a means of turning the public’s attention and regulators away from his paymasters’ business practices.

Take his effort to cripple the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and defame the character of its CEO, Wayne Pacelle. He ran a television ad during the 2013 Academy Awards telling people not to give to HSUS. He created a YouTube video viewed 1.7 million times calling Pacelle “the Bernie Madoff of the charity world.” He set up a non-profit front group called Humane Watch to undermine donations intended for the HSUS and a website attacking its funding. He even threatened the Better Business Bureau to drop HSUS' accreditation under the business group's Wise Giving Alliance, and then attacked BBB when it refused to do so.

Astute observers have concluded that Berman is guilty of the sins he regularly accuses others of. Legitimate watchdog groups, such as CharityNavigator.org, have characterized his web of non-profit front groups, which take in millions in tax-deductible corporate donations, as the fake charities. Tax law experts contacted by Bloomberg.com said his operation was comparable to Madoff’s, a shell game of financial transfers enriching Berman that likely violated tax laws. Investigative reporters have even traced e-mails from front groups who deny they’re working with him back to his office.

While he's in the box, the President signs a historic nuclear weapons accord with the Iranian Government...

If this Republican tweets that President Obama's Iranian accord is in fact a diversion from the problems with Obamacare, then we could classify that Republican to be an asshole. However, we're not sure as of yet that the Republican will tweet such a statement without us observing him.

Now, if some whiner says that we shouldn't call Republicans "assholes" because personal attacks are never appropriate, then that whiner is, by definition, asserting that the tweeting or non-tweeting Republican is not an asshole.

Considering both of these things, one could agree that the Congressional Republican is simultaneously an asshole and not an asshole (Though I'm not one to do that).

Opening the box and observing the Republican is either in the midst of tweeting like an asshole, or not tweeting and not being an asshole at this particular instant…

The question is, how do we know that the Congressional Republican is an asshole or not an asshole without opening the box?

What’s the first thing a disgusting sexist woman-hating pig thinks of when Democrats pass filibuster reform?
If you’re the sleaziest pig of all, the first thing that pops into your head is, of course, raping women.
In his latest attempt to reduce his roster of advertisers to zero, Limbaugh said:

“Forget the Senate for a minute. Let’s say, let’s take ten people in a room and they’re a group. And the room is made up of six men and four women. Right? The group has a rule that the men cannot rape the women. The group also has a rule that says any rule that will be changed must require six votes of the 10 to change the rule.”
Limbaugh continued his analogy by saying that “every now and then some lunatic in the group proposes to change the rule to allow women to be raped. But they never were able to get six votes for it. There were always the four women voting against it and there was, you know, two guys.”

“Well, the guy that kept proposing that women be raped finally got tired of it,” Limbaugh told his listeners. “He was in the majority and he said, you know what, we’re going to change the rule. Now all we need is five. And the women said, ‘you can’t do that.’ ‘Yes we are, we’re the majority, we’re changing the rule.’ And then they vote. Can the women be raped?”